Ian Jackson wrote:
> Thanks, Guy, for clarifying that issue. I've added the following to
> the programmers' manual:
> > When selecting which level of dependency to use you should consider
> > how important the depended-on package is to the functionality of the
> > one declaring the dependency.
Da
On Wed, 11 Sep 1996, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Thanks, Guy, for clarifying that issue. I've added the following to
> the programmers' manual:
> > When selecting which level of dependency to use you should consider
> > how important the depended-on package is to the functionality of the
> > one declari
Thanks, Guy, for clarifying that issue. I've added the following to
the programmers' manual:
> When selecting which level of dependency to use you should consider
> how important the depended-on package is to the functionality of the
> one declaring the dependency. Some packages are composed of
>
On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Guy Maor wrote:
>
> [very helpful description of dependencies deleted]
> I agree with Ian's definition.
me to. :-)
> The alternative is unpleasant - a multitude of tiny packages.
nevertheless dpkg should be divided into two binary packages:
dpkg (which is the most esentia
On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
> Ian Jackson and I have had several exchanges by private email
> having to do with the dependencies in dpkg, following my bug reports:
> #4262 (dpkg-source requires cpio) and #4263 (dpkg-source requires patch).
>
> We have now come to an impasse. I
> S> "Suggests:
> S> This is used to declare that one package may be more useful with one
> S> or more others. Using this field tells the packaging system and the
> S> user that the listed packages are be [sic] related to this one and can
> S> perhaps enhance its usefulness, but that installing th
6 matches
Mail list logo
